Kwey Petition Signatories / Supporters, On August 15, 2016 I sent Carolyn Bennett a letter requesting an invitation to participant in the collaborative process that Canada will launch in 2017 with First Nations and other Indigenous groups to examine the broader issues relating to Indian registration and Band membership. Below is the complete letter. --- To: Dr. Bennett, Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Cc: Jody Wilson-Raybould, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada; Patty Hajdu, Minister of Status of Women; Maryam Monsef, Minister of Democratic Relations Re: Consultation Process on Amending the Indian Act As you are aware Canada recently announced that it is taking a 2 stage action to eliminate sex-based discrimination in the Indian Act. This is in response to the February 2015 Descheneaux/Yantha decision regarding the residual discrimination against women and their descendants who were instated or reinstated with the 1985 amendment, as well as in response to the boarder sex-discrimination issues. I understand that in Stage 1, Canada will address the known residual sex discrimination outlined in the Descheneaux/Yantha decision. I also understand that Stage 2, to be launched in 2017, will be a collaborative process with First Nations and other Indigenous groups where Canada will examine and respond to the other broader forms of continuing sex-discrimination in the Act. This includes the matter of unknown/unstated paternity. (see http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1467227680166/1467227697623) I am writing this letter to request an invitation to participate in Stage 2 of the process as well as in submitting materials. Many people know that in the work I do I have been addressing the sex-discrimination in the Indian Act for over 30 years. In this work I have addressed issues of the ongoing sex-discrimination the descendants of women face; the matter of unknown and unstated paternity which was created through the 1985 amendment and subsequent department level policy development; how Indian status factors into the Anishinabek citizenship criteria and the Ontario Algonquin land claims process, again marginalizing non-status people; and more recently how the practice of tampering with long form birth documents by hospital and government employees is a barrier to Indigenous people’s entitlement to Indian status registration and thus their treaty rights. During this 30 year period I have been very committed: • Through living, observing, and thinking about the process of remedial legislation, both in 1985 and 2011, I have learned a lot about the legislative reform process. Specifically, how the process can be inadequate, skewed, and remain biased and partisan. • With Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto, and more recently the Law Office of Mary Eberts, as my legal representatives, I have taken court action specifically on the matter of unknown and unstated paternity where the Department of Justice has incurred over $750,000 (as of February 2016) defending Canada’s position in denying my Charter rights and consequently my treaty rights; • Through my court action I have read several expert reports on the matter of unknown and unstated paternity; • I have had many discussions with people who continue to be denied Indian status due to the ongoing sex-discrimination. • I have published in community news letters, newspapers, magazines, blogs, and academic journals on the sex-discrimination; • I have created posters, videos, and books suitable for community people and academic learners; • In 2011 I initiated and undertook a National Strategy to Raise Awareness on Unknown and Unstated Paternity; • In 2012 the Canadian Museum of Human Rights recorded my oral history on my work regarding the matter of unknown and unstated paternity and how it relates to Indigenous citizenship and Indigenous treaty rights; • I initiated and moderate an online petition on the matter of unknown and unstated paternity that currently has more than 3,000 signatures; • I have also spoken publicly on the topic of the continued and newly created sex-discrimination. Through this work I am knowledgeable in the matter of sex-discrimination and the Indian Act, and aware of how it is that sometimes the legislative reform process is a process whereby Canada amends legislation that inadequately addresses the discrimination. Further, I am aware that sometimes the legislative reform process is a process whereby new forms of discrimination become explicitly encoded, and aware that sometimes the legislative reform process is a process where carefully crafted silences can be encoded as a way to create space for discrimination to manifest at the level of departmental policy. The rituals and practices associated with the celebration of motherhood and childbirth must be preserved as sacred. When government officials interfere with this special process through legislation, policy, or standard operational procedures of administration in a way that denies dignity to a mother and her child, it is an disgrace. The well-being of mothers and their children must be at the forefront of all of our cultural practices. Clearly, mothers and children deserve more than being targeted through harmful policies and legislation. I look forward to receiving an invitation from you when Canada moves into Stage 2. Sincerely, Lynn Gehl, Ph.D, Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe --- Please know that it would be really helpful to me to read your valued comments regarding my effort thus far - Miigwetch